Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 12621
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
J. Sathya Narayana Prasad, J
M. Yaraf – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Writ Petition No.4958 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. S. Selvathirumurugan
For the Respondents: Mr. M. Shahjahan
The court may direct the concerned authority to consider and pass orders on the merits of a representation regarding removal from service within a stipulated timeframe without adjudicating the merits of the underlying dispute.
Headnote:The petitioner, a Grade II Police Constable, challenged the removal from service following repeated absences from duty and being declared a deserter. A writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider representations dated 06.06.2018 and 04.11.2019 against the removal order after a previous revision petition was rejected. The primary issue before the court was whether the petitioner's representations against the removal from service should be considered by the government. The court, without delving into the merits of the case, observed that the representations remained pending and the respondent had no objection to a direction for their disposal. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the petitioner's employment, unauthorized absence, and removal from service. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. request for direction to consider pending representations without merit adjudication. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. direction to the respondent to dispose of representations within eight weeks. (Para 6 , 7) |
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.06.2018 and 04.11.2019 against the orders of removal from service.
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking direction to the the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.06.2018 and 04.11.2019 against the orders of removal from service.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Grade II Police Constable through Uniformed Services Recruitment Board in the year 2009. Due to family problems, the petitioner went into depression and absented himself from duty from 14.06.2013 for 21 days and he was declared as a deserter by an order dated 10.07.2013. Thus, he has appeared before the authority on 15.07.2013 and after considering his representation, he was taken back for duty on 15.07.2013, however, he was imposed with a punishment of postponement of increment for two years without cumulative effect by an order dated 19.04.2014. Again, the petitioner was absented from duty from 19.07.2014 for 21 days and once again, he was declared as deserted vide order dated 14.08.2014. Hence, a charge memo was issued to him on 10.02.2015 and he was removed from service on 13.05.2015.
2.2. In view of the above, the petitioner has preferred a revision petition before the second respondent on 10.07.2015 and the same was rejected on 26.04.2016 stating that the petitioner has deserted himself from duty on 4 occasions previously. Against the rejection order, the petitioner sent a representation dated 06.06.2018 and 04.11.2019 to the first respondent. Since the representations being made, no action was taken by the first respondent. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
3. Though very many grounds have been raised in this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.06.2018 & 04.11.2019 and pass orders on merits, within a particular time frame to be fixed by this Court.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent has no objection for said order being passed.
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed on record.
6. Taking into consideration the factual aspects of the matter, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.06.2018 & 04.11.2019 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
22.08.2023
vm
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
